On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 1:04 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote:
...snip
>> Can we just make the .spec build those modules, and ship only the
> modules in the binary ( would need to also change the name of the
> package ) ??
>> iptables-module-<foo> -> would that be a potential name ?
Attached is a new src.rpm for a package that build the extra modules
as seperate packages.
> Has anyone done a packaging standard for iptables modules before ?
I haven't but the packages are now called iptables-mod-<name> for
iptables modules and iptables-ipv6-mod-<name> for ip6tables modules.
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Verhoeven - tim.verhoeven.be at gmail.com - 0479 / 88 11 83
Hoping the problem magically goes away by ignoring it is the
"microsoft approach to programming" and should never be allowed.
(Linus Torvalds)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: iptables-extras-1.3.5-1.2.1.src.rpm
Type: application/x-rpm
Size: 214208 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20080331/ece06a98/attachment.rpm>